Jose Mourinho

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Sort by date Sort by reaction score
SpursUltra said:
How long have you supported Tottenham again??

None of the above is unusual transfer business from Spurs you know. Not sure if you’ve ever noticed but we don’t compete with clubs like city and united for players. Occasionally we might make a big money signing. But not that often.

If you are going to pretend to be Spurs do a bit more research sonny jim.
Click to expand...
Hence why we have not been and will not be perennial contenders for titles.
 
Ed Vanderlay said:
What I don’t get is why the Jose supporters cannot admit his appointment was doomed to failure if that is what it takes. At least Porto has a great scouting network, everywhere else he has had money to compete domestically at least. This has not been the case with Spurs for roughly 30 years
So at least face reality and stop asking for time and money
Jose has never stayed anywhere , he is an instant fix and leave in toxic circumstances on most occasions.
Spurs will not give him the money you seek

So as Jose fans do you not think it is better he leaves before this experience damages his CV in his fans eyes

Let‘s both cut our losses, otherwise we are simply putting off the inevitable and making things worse.
Whether you want to hear it or not he was despised by large swathes of the fan base from day one. The terrible football and toxic behaviour will have reinforced those views and added countless others.
Therefore the atmosphere when the fans go back will not be a lift but the exact opposite making his tenure even more doomed to failure

i want better football at Spurs , you want glory for Jose, neither of us will get what we want without a divorce. So for the sake of the kids, [fans], Baldy and Jose must part company.

In a perfect world Baldy can’t live without Jose gets angry and storms out .We get adopted by a rich guardian who gives us the investment for the new manager that the previous 14 /15 managers never got
under Levy and Sugar
Click to expand...
You might get your preferred style of football with a different manager, but the point remains we will not be perennial contenders with our current recruitment policy no matter who the manager is.

Levy is always penny pinching, scouting seems worse than FM, and academy has not been streaming top talent. At least one of those has to change for the better
 
El Magnifico said:
You might get your preferred style of football with a different manager, but the point remains we will not be perennial contenders with our current recruitment policy no matter who the manager is.

Levy is always penny pinching, scouting seems worse than FM, and academy has not been streaming top talent. At least one of those has to change for the better
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone thinks we will be perennial contenders under ENIC.

However we do expect to be competitive, not fear anybody, play flowing football, with a manager playing to the strengths of the team, not regressing it to its weakest link, and creating such a dreadful atmosphere with players and fans alike.

At the moment Mourinho is really getting the least possible that any manager could get from our players, actually probably a lot less than any half decent manager would.
 
Bazali said:
Agreed but Poch also culpable
Click to expand...
Why is Mourinho not culpable for the sack of S*** being served up his whole tenure. He has put up the most miserable displays I have ever seen Spurs give in my 30+ years supporting Spurs. He is constantly out thought by managers of apparent lesser ability than him.

Then he is also one of the most arrogant SOB's I have ever seen I have not once seen him admit he was wrong his whole career.

If you are happy for a complete collapse next season when we have a completely disinterested squad and he starts blaming Kane and Son for missing the one clear cut chance they get a game.

Mourinho was finished the day Rui Faria fell out with him and went off to manage in Qatar. The man was responsible for running his training sessions and making Mourinho tactics work, he also was good at smoothing over things with the players when Mourinho pushed them too far. Jao Sacremento just does not have the ability to make up for Jose's flaws or supplement his strengths, at the end of the day he like many people are too overwhelmed by Jose's charm and charisma.
 
Guido said:
Right you fuckers who think it's our defence that's at fault! Read this piece, written by one of the most respected tactical writers in the game. He obviously communicates it far more eloquently than I've been trying to over in the Sanchez thread. But please do yourselves a favour and read it and understand our defensive issues are a consequence of a TEAM failing and not a DEFENDERS ONLY one.



Many years ago, there was a lively post-match debate on Sky Sports between Graeme Souness and Gordon Strachan.

The subject was the optimum way to defend corners, because the two Scots had just watched a team using zonal marking concede from a set piece.

Strachan was a proponent of defending zonally at corners, pointing to statistics about its increased effectiveness and explaining that it prevented attacking block-offs. Souness insisted that man-marking was a better approach. His main point, which he repeated on multiple occasions, was that “zonal marking lets players off the hook”.

Souness, whether or not he realised it, was effectively saying that his tactical preference stemmed from wanting to pin the blame for conceding on a player. If a zonal marking approach fails, the system — and therefore the manager who implements it — is considered culpable. But in a man-marking system, if someone gets outjumped by an opponent, you can point the finger directly at them.

And therefore what appeared a tactical debate was, in actual fact, nothing of the sort. It was really a debate about man-management, about the relationship between players and their boss, about the extent to which a manager must carry the can for their failings on the pitch. Strachan focused upon which was best for the team. Souness was about which was best for him.

This decade-old debate came to mind this week, in light of Jose Mourinho’s reaction to Tottenham Hotspur drawing at Newcastle United from 2-1 up with six minutes left, while permitting their highest single-game xG figure of the Premier League season so far. BBC reporter Juliette Ferrington asked Mourinho why his side keep on relinquishing leads, whereas previously his sides were renowned for hanging onto them. “Same coach, different players,” Mourinho responded.

Not for the first time, a revealing answer stemmed from a question framed in light of his previous successes — Mourinho has a habit of giving more detailed answers to questions that begin with things like “Jose, as someone who has won it all…”

It would be quite possible, though, for his players to respond in kind.

To varying extents, the likes of Toby Alderweireld, Eric Dier and Davinson Sanchez have previously played in a stern Spurs defence under Mauricio Pochettino. That was an entirely different style of defending, based around pressure in advanced positions and a high line.

When that defensive approach got breached, we tended to talk about the high line rather than the individuals.

It’s the same, for example, for Hansi Flick’s Bayern Munich, who used an extraordinarily high line en route to European Cup success last year. It was impossible to watch them defend against Barcelona in the last eight or final opponents Paris Saint-Germain without almost jumping out of your seat, such was the bravery of their high line. Had they conceded to PSG from a through-ball and a run in behind, Flick would have been blamed. But he would probably have accepted responsibility, for he knows that a high-risk, high-reward strategy is best for his side.

Mourinho once used that approach. Watch his triumphant Porto side throughout the Champions League knockout phase in 2003-04 and you’ll be surprised by how high his defence position themselves. These days, his defences sit deeper, dropping back to their own penalty box quickly, particularly if Tottenham have gone ahead. On multiple occasions this season, that approach has cost them. While Mourinho would explain it forms part of his attacking strategy, attempting to draw the opposition forward and give Spurs space to counter-attack into, rarely have his side constructed regular breaks to justify their deep positioning.

The thing with defending deep is that you’re asking your defenders to do more traditional defensive tasks. There are more aerial challenges inside your box, more situations where you have to stick tight to a player who is in a goalscoring position, more danger to anticipate and more blocks to be made. It also means that it’s more possible to concede goals that are not, in isolation, attributable to managerial strategy.

When Tottenham lost 2-1 away to Liverpool in December, for example, the goals came from a crazy deflection, and then a late set-piece concession (from, of course, man-to-man marking).

The first goal was unfortunate, but if you allow the opposition 76 per cent of the possession and 17 shots to your eight, there’s more chance of one finding its way into the net almost accidentally. Similarly, if you allow that much pressure, you concede more corners than you win (seven to four in this case), and there’s more chance of one leading to a goal. These things add up over time.

It is sometimes said that Mourinho is antiquated tactically; that his inability to win trophies recently is because he hasn’t adjusted strategically. There’s clearly an element of truth to that, in comparison to Jurgen Klopp and Pep Guardiola, but his primary problem is surely his inability to command the respect of players over a sustained period of time, evidenced by sudden drop-offs in his pre-Tottenham stints with Chelsea and Manchester United.

It came as little surprise that, after Mourinho responded to Sunday’s 2-2 on Tyneside by blaming his players, some of them objected. It’s difficult to imagine many other current managers responding similarly.

But that’s logical if Mourinho’s tactical approach is also out of step with that of his contemporaries. The tactical development of football, particularly over the last couple of decades, is about universality, about particular tasks being done collectively. Modern sides press aggressively from the front and play out from the back, meaning defensive play starts with your attackers and attacking play starts in defence. Every concept is a task for the entire side.

Mourinho’s approach is more old-school. He works less than other contemporary managers on prepared attacking possession routines, preferring to allow playmakers to find solutions themselves. In a world of false nines, Mourinho has always liked true strikers such as Didier Drogba, Diego Milito and Zlatan Ibrahimovic. He also likes proper defenders that belong in their own box: John Terry, Lucio, Ricardo Carvalho.

With that approach, it’s more viable to pin the blame on somebody when things go wrong. If a goal is conceded, a defender is more obviously at fault than the system. And this comes back to that Strachan-Souness debate, which demonstrated that tactical decision-making and man-management are not entirely separate concepts.

Mourinho’s reputation has never been lower, which is why he is determined to shift culpability onto his players and protect himself.

It’s entirely possible that his tactical decision-making is also geared towards absolving himself of blame.

Now, he’s fighting to prove he deserves to be in charge of Tottenham, rather than in his previous role: in a Sky Sports studio, nodding along with Souness.
Click to expand...

Zonal vs Man-marking is about management style? That's just total nonsense. Both systems have their pros and cons and has nothing to do with management style, with an hybrid approach being my preferred setup. (FYI if a goal is conceded from a zone assigned to a player, you can still directly fault that player)

Sorry but who ever wrote that piece is either being disingenuous or clueless about the game.
 
We are the only team that has top scorers in the top six Son and kane . Son has more goals than City Woolwich Leicester and united top scorers. We are in the top 4 in scoring in the league, get this we are also top 4 with goals allowed in the league, Son is also top five in the league in assist. So it sounds like all this shit is down to playing style and game management to me which ultimately thats down to the coach.
 
Bazali said:
Agreed but Poch also culpable
Click to expand...
For getting a bunch of players who had just come 7th in the league and most thought were useless, to challenging for leagues and reaching our only champions league final in history. Tell you what I’d much rather take that and being labelled bottle jobs for coming close to winning the league than this fucking mess we’re in now. I was 100% behind the sacking of Poch when it happened, but I hate people talking about him like he was a failure here, because he didn’t win a league cup.
 
Belgrano said:
We knew about the arrogance and his man management style, and were warned about the tactics. Most of us were hoping to be proved wrong. It hasn't happened, and instead we have a clear answer to the question of whether 'football tactics have moved on'.

We've wasted Poch's foundation, and instead of adapting his tactics to the players at his disposal, Mourinho has tried to play like prime Inter or more recently Athletico Madrid. Arguably the worst possible use of a squad heavily weighted to attacking quality.

I must admit I thought he was a good appointment at the time, but it's turned very sour. We need him out before he does too much more damage.
Click to expand...
What foundation?
He left a shitshow
 
ginola92 said:
For getting a bunch of players who had just come 7th in the league and most thought were useless, to challenging for leagues and reaching our only champions league final in history. Tell you what I’d much rather take that and being labelled bottle jobs for coming close to winning the league than this fucking mess we’re in now. I was 100% behind the sacking of Poch when it happened, but I hate people talking about him like he was a failure here, because he didn’t win a league cup.
Click to expand...
That’s not why he was a failure and you know it
 
enfield1985 said:
Why is Mourinho not culpable for the sack of S*** being served up his whole tenure. He has put up the most miserable displays I have ever seen Spurs give in my 30+ years supporting Spurs. He is constantly out thought by managers of apparent lesser ability than him.

Then he is also one of the most arrogant SOB's I have ever seen I have not once seen him admit he was wrong his whole career.

If you are happy for a complete collapse next season when we have a completely disinterested squad and he starts blaming Kane and Son for missing the one clear cut chance they get a game.

Mourinho was finished the day Rui Faria fell out with him and went off to manage in Qatar. The man was responsible for running his training sessions and making Mourinho tactics work, he also was good at smoothing over things with the players when Mourinho pushed them too far. Jao Sacremento just does not have the ability to make up for Jose's flaws or supplement his strengths, at the end of the day he like many people are too overwhelmed by Jose's charm and charisma.
Click to expand...
He is partially culpable

I’ve never said that he wasn’t

So are the majority of our squad
 
Guido said:
I know what he took over, I just listed it.

Poch got sacked fella. The rationale is it's time for a change, the players we flat, Poch was probably flat. It's why coaches move as Pepp did at Barca and Bayern and Klopp at Dortmund. It's not really a failing, in high-intensity management, it's quite common, not just in football, in Sales, it's very common for the top Sales managers to get moved on or promoted, with the chance of keeping the intercity high by the new bloke.

What did Moyes take over, a better team than Spurs?

Fucking hell, it's staggering to find anyone still clinging onto this Jose Hill. Mate climb down there are fewer public places to die on and you must be feeling lonely surrounded with your Mourinista's for company. There are Spurs fans all waiting for you once you've had the lobotomy.

*Levy was absolutely right to keep Dele (a loan would have been acceptable to get him playing again), Jose's treatment of Dele has been a scandal, as it has been with other players. It's instrumental in the player dissatisfaction we are seeing now. Most other managers try their best to create a united team, Jose as we all knew before his arrival doesn't and he deliberately wants one of tension and conflict, fine if this was what brought him his success twenty years ago, but name me ONE manager that does this in the game today, then name me one manager in the elite teams that apply this methodology.....I'll wait.
Click to expand...
I am not and never have been a ‘mouranista’ or whatever you call it

He was never my first choice to replace Poch
I advocated Potter if you remember

I have backed him as he’s our manager and want him to get a fair crack of the whip which he hasn’t yet had imv

He’s certainly made mistakes in tactics, setting up and purchases but he’s inherited a largely shite squad which I’ve already gone into

You don’t agree
Fine
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom